If homeownership is the American dream, then mortgage foreclosure is the American nightmare. Homeowners often are victims of predatory lending, and many do not understand the terms of the mortgages into which they enter. As a result, homeowners often accept higher interest rates even if they qualify for lower-cost mortgages. The Truth in Lending Act (TILA) attempts to protect consumers from this predatory behavior and primarily requires lenders to make certain disclosures to borrowers. Lenders’ violations of TILA are often not discovered until after foreclosure is initiated and attorneys bring claims or counterclaims under these statutes. Of these, TILA claims asserting violations in the disclosure process are the most common. Pennsylvania courts, however, do not allow for TILA counterclaims in mortgage foreclosure actions.

This Comment will examine counterclaims in Pennsylvania mortgage foreclosure actions. It will compare the rationale behind barring Truth in Lending Act (TILA) counterclaims with the scope of the Deficiency Judgment Act, which allows lenders to bring actions for deficiency judgments in mortgage foreclosure actions. This Comment will ultimately argue that an inequitable result arises from relying on an in rem distinction to bar a legal remedy for borrowers in residential mortgage foreclosures while sidestepping that same distinction to ensure relief for lenders. This leads to the conclusion that Pennsylvania courts should allow for TILA counterclaims in residential mortgage foreclosure actions.

Rita Burns is a J.D. Candidate at Temple University Beasley School of Law, Class of 2018.

Jonathan Grode, U.S. Practice Director at Green and Spiegel, joins the podcast to discuss the evolving landscape of business immigration law. Grode, who serves as an adjunct professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law, also shares humanitarian considerations and an anecdote from 2017’s travel ban.

Professor Stefanie A. Lindquist (Editor-in-Chief of Temple Law Review, Volume 61) joins the podcast to discuss the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Lindquist serves as deputy provost and vice president for academic affairs at Arizona State University and has written extensively on the Court, including in her book, “Measuring Judicial Activism.” The […]

The Parliament Podcast welcomes Judge Nelson Diaz (LAW 1972) to discuss his forthcoming memoir, “Not from Here, Not from There.” The book chronicles Diaz from his youth in the Bronx to his ascent to becoming the first Latino judge to serve in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, general counsel for the Department of Housing and Urban […]

Temple Law Review, Volume 91 has launched the publication’s first podcast. In its first episode, the podcast welcomes Steven Silver (LAW 2013) to discuss the Supreme Court’s Murphy v. NCAA decision, local adoption of sports betting, and related considerations such as integrity fees and data agreements. The episode is available on both SoundCloud and YouTube.